The Georgia Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) Council has revoked the law enforcement certification of a deputy whose employment history came under scrutiny following allegations that she was compensated by two government agencies for overlapping work hours.
Janean Strobert, a former Savannah Police officer and Chatham County District Attorney’s Office investigator was hired by the Chatham County Sheriff’s Office earlier this year while under POST investigation for double dipping. She’d been fired from both agencies prior to her hiring by Sheriff Richard Coleman.
As previously reported by The Georgia Virtue, Strobert acknowledged during an administrative investigation that she had worked extra-duty assignments for Savannah Police while simultaneously receiving compensation from the district attorney’s office. She maintained that she believed the arrangement was permissible when she was released from her regular duties or placed on call. You can read the full story here.
Strobert also made headlines in July for an incident involving Savannah PD, a Failure to Appear warrant, a series of name drops, and the preferential treatment of a woman Strobert identified as her ‘mother.’
POST Investigation
According to POST records, a POST Investigator spoke with Strobert in December 2025 regarding her terminations and the allegations of double dipping. From the case summary:
“Strobert expressed that there was never a complaint that she wasn’t doing her work with the Eastern Judicial Circuit. This was confirmed by a lack of complaints from the Eastern Judicial Circuit for past disciplinary issues…Officer Strobert further explained that she is working to pay her way through college and support her 8-year-old alone. Officer Strobert said she is on track to complete her doctorate in the summer of this year. Officer Strobert described that she believes this case was brought forth because a former terminated employee complained after seeing Officer Strober working at a school where that terminated employee has a child enrolled.”
The report also noted that the POST Investigator made several attempts by phone, email, and other employees of the Eastern Judicial Circuit/Chatham County District Attorney’s Office to contact the Chief Investigator, but was not able to do so. The investigator “did speak with one employee at the Eastern Judicial Circuit. That employee was not clear on whether or not the policy states they can not work off-duty jobs without notifying supervision.”
“It was verified that the Savannah POlice Department policy clearly states that you can’t receive compensation from two entities for the same hour,” the case summary reads, noting that POST Council received a copy of the Savannah PD policy, the Savannah PD investigation, and a recorded interview.
Strobert’s Response to POST Investigation
Records obtained by TheGeorgiaVirtue in November 2026 show that Strobert offered a response to the allegation of unauthorized secondary employment and the termination from both the Savannah Police Department and the Chatham County District Attorney’s Office.
“This response is provided for the purpose of ensuring that the Council has a complete and accurate understanding of the circumstances, applicable policies, and customary employment practices relevant to this matter,” she wrote.
“At the time of the alleged misconduct, I was employed as a criminal investigator at the Chatham County District Attorney’s Office and also served as a Reserve Officer with the Savannah Police Department. The allegation originated from an anonymous complaint submitted to the Savannah Police Department’s Internal Affairs Unit, asserting that I worked multiple off-duty assignments without authorization from my full-time supervisory authority at the District Attorney’s Office.
It is critically important to note that, during the period in question, the Chatham County District Attorney’s Office did not maintain any formal written policy, procedure, directive, or reporting requirement governing sworn officers engaging in secondary employment or off-duty law enforcement work. Specifically, there was no policy requiring pre-approval, written notification, or supervisory documentation related to outside law enforcement employment or reserve service. In the absence of such policy guidance, sworn officers relied upon verbal instructions and customary workplace practices to determine compliance expectations.
Prior to service as a Reserve Officer with the Savannah Police Department, I engaged in a direct conversation with supervisory personnel at the District Attorney’s Office. During that discussion, I was granted permission to engage in off-duty law enforcement work, with the sole state restriction that I was not to work assignments involving bars or nightclubs. No additional limitations, reporting requirements, scheduling restrictions, or approval processes were communicated at that time or at any later point during my employment.
Additionally, it was a common and widely accepted practice within the District Attorney’s Office for investigators to be released before 5:00 p.m. on some days, following verbal communication with supervisors. These early releases were not formally documented and were routinely conveyed through verbal authorization or informal communication channels. This practice further demonstrated that scheduling flexibility and non-documented supervisory approvals were a recognized operational norm within the office environment.
From a professional standards and administrative accountability perspective, sustained findings of misconduct typically require a clearly articulated policy, adequate notice to the employee, and evidence of a knowing or reckless violation of that policy. Before the date of termination, none of this occurred. In this case, the essential elements of policy clarity, employee notice, and intentional misconduct were not present. Consequently, the disciplinary outcomes imposed were not proportionate to the actual circumstances. They did not reflect the operational realities under which sworn officers were expected to function within the District Attorney’s Office.
I fully recognize the importance of integrity, transparency, and accountability in law enforcement service. Throughout my career, I have demonstrated a consistent commitment to ethical conduct and professional responsibility. I respectfully assert that the allegation in this matter reflects an apparent misunderstanding of policy expectations rather than evidence of misconduct or deception. Due to the political climate at the above office, this can be characterized as selective enforcement, a tactic used to defame a person’s character and/or morality.
Accordingly, I respectfully request that the Georgia Peace Officer Standards and Training Council consider the absence of governing policy, the supervisory permissions granted, and the established workplace practices when evaluating this matter and any potential impact on my peace officer certification. I further request that this response be entered into the official record for consideration during the Council’s review.
Thank you for your time, careful consideration, and continued commitment to fair and objective standards in law enforcement professionalism.
Respectfully submitted,
Janean Strobert
Former Criminal Investigator, Chatham County District Attorney’s Office
Former Reserve Officer, Savannah Police Department
POST Council Decision
Despite Strobert’s plea for mercy from the POST Council, her Basic Law Enforcement Certification was revoked. According to POST records, the decision to revoke her certification was made on October 9, 2026. Her POST record on November 9 still showed she is actively employed in law enforcement as a deputy sheriff with the Chatham County Sheriff’s Office.
A request for comment from the Chatham County Sheriff’s Office was sent on November 9. Public Information Officer Tawanna Garrett did not respond to that request for comment.
Sheriff Coleman was investigated by both the GBI and POST several years ago for similar accusations. Records indicate he was under investigation with the Georgia Bureau of Investigation for allegations of stealing of time and double dipping. According to the POST Investigation case summary, “The district attorney decided not to prosecute because of a lack of pattern of violations.” It did not mention the allegations were unfounded. POST recommended revoking Coleman’s law enforcement certification, though he was later placed on Probation after agreeing to a Consent Order in August 2007.
